Strategic litigation, searchable.
104 cases across 14 issue areas. Filter by topic, outcome, or precedent strength. Each profile is a starting point for adaptation, not a finishing line.
- United States (District Court, District of Columbia)· 2025· District Court, District of Columbia
Americans for Immigrant Justice v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Civil Action No. 2022-3118)
US court opinion from District Court, District of Columbia. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FLORENCE IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS PROJECT, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 22-3118 (CKK) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM O
united statesimmigration detention - High Court of Australia· 2025· High Court of Australia
MJZP v Director-General of Security
The validity of a security assessment by the Director-General of Security, potentially impacting immigration or citizenship matters
immigrationnational-security - United Kingdom Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)· 2024· United Kingdom Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
Gurung, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (ACRS meaning - policy interpretation principles)
The case concerns the interpretation of the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme (ACRS) policy and principles of policy interpretation in immigration matters.
refugeeasylumimmigration - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF H.T. v. GERMANY AND GREECE (no. 13337/19)
Whether the applicant's treatment and expulsion would expose him to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment, thus violating the prohibition of torture
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF M.A. AND Z.R. v. CYPRUS (no. 39090/20)
Whether Cyprus's expulsion of the applicants violated their rights under the prohibition of torture, the prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens and the right to an effective remedy.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024favorable
CASE OF K.J. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (no. 27584/20)
Whether the applicants' expulsion to North Korea would expose them to a real risk of death or torture, violating their right to life and the prohibition of inhuman treatment, and whether their pre‑expulsion detention in Russia complied with the right to liberty and security.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024High precedent
CASE OF VEREIN KLIMASENIORINNEN SCHWEIZ AND OTHERS v. SWITZERLAND (no. 53600/20)
Whether Switzerland's insufficient climate policies breach the applicants' right to private and family life and their right of access to a court.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024adverse
CASE OF Y AND OTHERS v. SWITZERLAND (no. 9577/21)
Whether the applicants' expulsion to Albania would expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the right to life under Article 2 and the prohibition of torture under Article 3.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - United States (Court of Appeals for the First Circuit)· 2024· Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Escobar Larin v. Garland (24-1428)
US court opinion from Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit Nos. 23-2088, 24-1428 JOSE RODOLFO ESCOBAR LARIN, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. PETITIONS FOR REVIEW OF ORDERS OF THE BOARD OF IMMIG
united statesimmigration detention - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2024
CASE OF SHEROV AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 54029/17)
Whether Poland complied with the Court's judgment by providing adequate information on measures to prevent new violations and by paying the compensation awarded.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF ALHOWAIS v. HUNGARY (no. 59435/17)
Whether Hungary failed to comply with its obligations under the right to life and the prohibition of torture by not conducting an effective investigation and by not protecting the applicant’s right to life.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Australia (National)· 2023· High Court of AustraliafavorableHigh precedent
NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] HCA 37
Whether indefinite immigration detention of a non-citizen who cannot be removed in the reasonably foreseeable future is within Commonwealth power.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementimmigration detentionindefinite detention - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF ISRAILOV v. RUSSIA (no. 21882/09)
Whether the Russian authorities violated the applicant’s right to life, the prohibition of torture and the right to liberty, and whether they conducted an effective investigation into those alleged violations.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023adverse
CASE OF W.A. AND OTHERS v. ITALY (no. 18787/17)
Whether the proposed expulsion of the applicants to Sudan would expose them to a real risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3 (the prohibition of torture).
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF S.S. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 56417/19)
Whether the applicants' removal to Serbia would constitute a collective expulsion of aliens and expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2023favorable
CASE OF A.M.A. v. THE NETHERLANDS (no. 23048/19)
Whether the applicant's removal to Bahrain would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 (the prohibition of torture).
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsadverse
CASE OF KHASANOV AND RAKHMANOV v. RUSSIA (no. 28492/15)
Whether the applicants' extradition to Kyrgyzstan would expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture under Article 3.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF A.B. AND OTHERS v. POLAND (no. 42907/17)
Whether the applicants' removal to Belarus would expose them to treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture, and whether the removal constituted a collective expulsion of aliens in breach of the Protocol.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human RightsfavorableHigh precedent
CASE OF H.F. AND OTHERS v. FRANCE (no. 24384/19)
Whether the French authorities’ refusal to allow the applicants, who are French nationals, to return to France violated their right not to be expelled from their own country under Article 3 of Protocol No. 4.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2022· European Court of Human Rightsadverse
CASE OF A.A. AND OTHERS v. NORTH MACEDONIA (no. 55798/16)
Whether the applicants' removal from North Macedonia constituted a collective expulsion prohibited by the Convention and whether they had an effective remedy to challenge that measure.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4